On 04/11/2017 03:30 AM, Christophe Lyon wrote:
Hi Vladimir,
On 10 April 2017 at 17:05, Vladimir Makarov <vmaka...@redhat.com> wrote:
This is the second try to fix
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70478
The first try patch triggered a latent bug and broke one Fortran testcase
on x86-64.
The patch was successfully bootstrapped on x86-64 and tested on x86-64,
ppc64, and aarch64.
Committed as rev. 246808.
This patch causes regression on arm*hf configurations:
Executed from: gcc.target/arm/arm.exp
gcc.target/arm/armv8_2-fp16-move-1.c scan-assembler-times ldrh\\tr[0-9]+ 2
gcc.target/arm/armv8_2-fp16-move-1.c scan-assembler-times strh\\tr[0-9]+ 2
gcc.target/arm/armv8_2-fp16-move-1.c scan-assembler-times
vld1\\.16\\t{d[0-9]+\\[[0-9]+\\]}, \\[r[0-9]+\\] 2
gcc.target/arm/armv8_2-fp16-move-1.c scan-assembler-times
vmov\\.f16\\tr[0-9]+, s[0-9]+ 4
gcc.target/arm/armv8_2-fp16-move-1.c scan-assembler-times
vmov\\.f16\\ts[0-9]+, r[0-9]+ 4
gcc.target/arm/armv8_2-fp16-move-1.c scan-assembler-times
vst1\\.16\\t{d[0-9]+\\[[0-9]+\\]}, \\[r[0-9]+\\] 2
I've committed a patch which is supposed to fix the regression.
